Skip to main content

About this Show





San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Channel 89 (615 MHz)






San Francisco 7, Mancell 4, Avalos 3, Cal 3, Weiner 3, Chiu 3, Tom Borden 2, Chu 2, Kim 2, Tom Scott 2, Campos 2, Un 1, Ken Mcgary 1, Niel 1, Mancel 1, Christopher 1, The Public 1, Glen Davis 1, Olding 1, America 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    January 8, 2013
    10:30 - 11:00am PST  

literally as we move forward. thank you. >> thank you. >> and again, we want to thank mr. moskovich and his partner and the rest of his family and we look forward to the january presentation. madam clerk, if you could call item number five. >> award an 18 move consultant contract with options to extend to two additional two year terms, to itercircumstance in an amount not-to-exceed $130,000 for the vehicle level of service and transit speed monitoring as part of the 2013 congestion management program, and this is an action item. >> and this became before the finance committee and i don't have any speaker cards. let me ask any member of the public who would like to speak on item five? seeing un, public comment is closed and let me take a roll call? >> avalos? >> aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> chiu >> aye >> chu.
>> aye. >> cohen >> aye. >> fer ril. >> aye. >> kim. absent. >> olague. >> aye. >> weiner. >> aye. >> item passes if you could call item six. >> award three treer year conduct alt contracts with the option to extend for two additional one year periods to arup north america limited and nelson nygaard consulting associate and stantec consulting services and this is an action item. >> before we take action, is there any member of the public who would like to speak on item? >> public comment is closed. >> could we take the house, same call? >> item passes. >> item seven? . >> authorize the ex-did i have director to execute an amendment to the memorandum of the agreement with the san
francisco mun nis pal transportation agency for the van ness avenue bus rapid transit project to provide additional $208,862 in proeshted prop k funds to the sfmta bringing the sfmta's prop k budget to the total amount not to ex-see $349,362. >> is there any member of the public who would like to comment? >> seeing none, could we take the same in-house call. item passes. >> could you call number 8? >> appoint glen davis, aaron 2k3w0e8ds commission and christopher wadding to the citizen's advisory committee for two year terms. >> is is there any member of the public who would like to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. the same house and call. >> same house and call item passes. >> number nine, recommend that
cal train proceed with design of quint street bridge replacement option one, berm design allocate, $352,184 and prop k funds to the san francisco department of the public works for the conceptual design and environment review of the quint jerrioconnector road. >> and i do have a speaker card. labron is there any another member that would like to speak on this item please come forward. >> i have a presentation. >> there we go. >> back in 2005, thank you for the opportunity. the committee have landed on the beautiful station design and they ran two rams which you can see at the bottom and a pedestrian underpass under the quint street bridge. now i move forward to 2012, and we need the ability of having
two more tracks for high speed rail and cal train so that we don't... on transbay and the problem now that we have is where the proposal is to put a connector road, we no longer with the room to put in the platform and so that becomes the real issue. as you can see from the design, the ramps have disappeared and the pedestrian and the pass is also gone, so i would like to do in the time that is remaining, is to show you a solution which is to design a modio which is the foundation for the station that could be installed over a couple of days. and while we wait for this to
come up, while this is running the point that i would like to make, you can vacate quint street if you want to but you have to move the connector road to the other side. the response that i got just now is that the pedestrian connections and something that we can do later. i respectfully disagree, it has to be addressed now, we have to design the station and have everything working together. and you can watch the video or we can accept it but you can guess what is going to happen to this. thank you, and happy holidays. >> thank you very much. is there any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? >> seeing, none, public comment is closed. >> this is an action item that can be formed and plans and programs the house has exchanged if we could do roll call. >> commissioner cohen. >> thank you very much, i actually just wanted to make a
response to what mr. labron was raising, if you could speak to that i appreciate that. >> >> if you would come to the podium. >> good morning, tilly deputy for planning. in response to his comments which we have heard and addressed as well in conjunction with cal train staff. my understanding is that the primary comment is that the future high speed rail plans which may install four tracking would be in conflict with the connector road that we would propose to develop that. in the future if there is a need for four-track service, that there would be potentially a look at that four-tracking in this area and also bi pass tracks that would completely by pass this area to allow it to occur in another location, and there could be an underground
alignment. at this point, the agencies are working under the current regional agreement, the assumption there is that it is a blended service on two tracks and the two tracks that exist today, the tracks would be sufficient for higher speed, service and that is our long-term planning assumption and horizon and so that the development of the connector road is consistent with that scenario. and if that future time or the high speed rail authorities or the agencies would like to contemplate higher capacity service with additional capacity and there are several options that need to be looked at including bi pass tracks as well as four-tracking in this area, with regard to the pedestrian access, we believe that the ada compliant ramps that are part of the station design are consistent and adequate for providing that access, those plans are consistent with the future project if that should be the selection of the authority and with the connector road. with the pedestrian access is
provided under the current design. >> thank you, very much. colleagues, any other questions? >> so the house has changed when we have a roll call on this item. >> avalos? >> yes. >> campos? >> aye. >> chiu. >> aye. >> chu. >> aye. cohen. >> aye. >> elsbernd. >> aye. >> if her ril. >> aye. >> mar. aye. >> olague. >> aye. >> weiner. >> aye. >> the item passes. >> thank you. >> item passes. if you could call item ten. >> adopt the proposition to aa strategic plan with the conditions this is an action item. >> and i have a number of speaker cards on this item. so let me call them out. tom scott, tom borden, ken mcgary, may wo ng and roland labron. but any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item please come forward. again, this is on item number
ten. are the folks who signed the speaker cards please come up? >> go ahead, sir. >> hi, i'm tom borden and i am with sf urban riders and another group whose name shall not be mentioned but i just wanted to review some history on the park. and basically my premise is that mancel is a bright that has been on the park by the transit planners and this has been realized since the first master plan was put together in 1983 and a lot of things have changed over the course of
these master plans in the 1983 master plan, they said that mancell something had to be done about mancel and the plan proposed dropping it down on the north side of the ridge, and that did not seem too workable. and then in the 1985 master plan, they decided to close mancell from the two ends of shelly and force people to drive around that horse shoe of shelly to get around the park and that was dropped. in 1989 they gave up fixing mancell and in 1997, they decided to embrace the automobile and there was no mention of fixing mancell and i wanted to read this one part from the master plan. the system should as the primary goal create and maintain a system of recreational roadways where the pedestrian movement and slow pleasure driving have priority.
non-recreational travel should be restricted to mancell street. and the one consistent thing through all of these plans is the assessment of what mancell does to the park and i will just read this other section from the original 1983 plan. mancell is aligned on long the top of the ridge preempting several acres of choice, plat land in the center of the park, although carrying light volumes of traffic between neighborhoods, it is designed for high speed traffic with no provisions for turn outs or access points to serve the park facilities. >> this street, actually a little used stretch of high speed highway is greatly over designed and used a major open space of the park and divides the park in two. and that is pretty much the same situation it is today. and the park would be just
amazing, and it would be an amazing improvement for the park if this road were basically utterly destroyed and turned into a winding country lane, but thank you. >> next speaker, please? >> commissioners, my name is ken mcgary and i volunteered with save the park. and we are dedicated to understanding and and protecting the wild places and we organize parties and send out newsletters around to 1,000 friends of the park. and i am active in the collaborativive which brings together neighbors and community groups working for positive change and the neighbor and advocates have discussed ways to improve mancell, some of the stuff that has long been discussed, lane calms and traffic protections would open up the ridge lane to runners and cyclists and moms
with baby strollers, it would also reconnect the north and south halves of the park and bring back the less hectic pass of the road build in 30s. >> the plan included closing one side to auto traffic to reclaim several acres of road bed as a new park. we think that this approach deserves serious study and could bring an exciting new public promenade that would serve many communities. it bisects one of the great places in the system. owls make their home in the wood. and both in 1988 and 97 master plans declared that new features should emphasize
simple form. and of course he wanted everything to appear as natural as possible. luckily, fortunately complete streets guidelines do make consideration that allows us for context and setting when designing the multimodel corridors so we request that this project proceed with an eye towards view sheds and minimizing light pollution and wild life impact and an ear towards minimizing south pollution, we greatly appreciate the efforts of everyone working to transform this corridor and we look forward to working with agency and other park groups to improve transportation options in the park. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please? >> commissioner, campos, i would like to speak em 12. >> great. >> is there any other member of the public that would like to speak on this item come forward. >> my name is tom scott.
very briefly i want to ask that this... i am grateful today that the agency is taking on this project, it is in need of traffic calming and safety measures i cross it twice a day and it is a scary event twice a day. i want to emphasize and encourage that the funds for this project not be is minimal to none that come out of the fund. the city, the neighborhood and the community fought hard for every dollar and it could be dried up in a heart beat, where there are so many other infrastructure needs in the park. i agree that the traffic calming is needed and i am glad that it is going to move forward let's keep our hands off of the park bond money to do it. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please? >> >> i want to bring to your attention is the new boundaries
that are drown and you having jurisdiction of the district nine, and you are now closed to what they are talking about mcclarin park. and the gentleman here earlier on gave you the history which many of times when we looked at the master plan, and the many of the documentation that has come about from the 80s, to the late 90s, again and again, in developing new strategies we reinvent the wheel. now, that street mancell street needs some attention.
and not a supervisor bothering the park has brought that to our attention. but that needs to be done right now, is to have focused meetings, with the people who really know about mancell park, and about mancel street and mcclarin park. you may not believe it *.
>> one reason that it is on the agenda is that we can have the money for that purpose and the direct response of what has
been raised by the community. if i could ask the executive director to comment. >> i will say a couple of things to the chief deputy is that the main point that i would like to make is that the probability funds that are specifically favor projects that are complete street projects and this is a very good example of that. and in fact, the project designed addresses a number of these issues that some of the commenters have raised. particularly the business of reducing speed and width and so on, we have that information directly in the applications before you and let the chief deputy give you the details. i am very satisfied that this project is doing, if not 100 percent, of what the community might want, it is moving this facility very much in that direction. >> thank you. >> i think that keep this very quick, this item is the project
is recommended for the prop a and it is in the running for the grant funds. this is a three-way project between rec and park and the san francisco agency and the department of public works. the concept proposal right now is reducing the traffic lanes from four to two, one main in each direction. adding sidewalks, and build outs and limited speed light and bicycle facilities. very importantly under the one-bay grant process in january, most likely the authority board will be asked to allocate the funds for further project development. one of the main tasks is for the agency to go out and get buy-in on the concept define and refine that. >> thank you. >> the house has changed so if we could have a roll call on this item. >> commissioner avalos aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> chiu. >> aye. >> chu.
>> aye. >> cohen >> aye. >> elsbernd. >> aye. >> ferrill e >> aye. >> kim. aye. >> olague. aye. >> and commissioner weiner? >>ite aye. >> the item passes if you could call the next item. >>al locate, $3 stx 390 stx 887 in proposition aa funds with conditions to the department of public works two requests and $1 stx 683,000 in proposition aafunds with the conditions to fung municipal transportation agency for one request, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules. and any member of the public that like to for him forward. seeing no member of the public could we take the same house and call? >> the same house and call. >> item 12. >> approve the initial one day
area grant pool of con date projects? >> any member of the public who would like to speak on number 12? >> come forward. >> fran martin and i have long been involved in transportation issues in the valley. due to the activities with the project of the valley planning. also, as a former ta member and the board member of the sf parks alliance which are not represented today. i support the improvement project including the line and the bike lanes, this improvement pro-yekt is in good improvement and vital transportation corridor between the western and eastern parts of the city. the route from to the west of mancell street, the only two main lanes are 20 blocks away. opposed and coming to the south east, up to 10,000 units of the
valley alone. this transportation corridor will take on an even greater important, and all expected and existing residents. and this is to say nothing of the major number of new jobs and transportation needs. these projects fulfill the criteria for prop a and will beg funding for the future... and the bay shore station. four schools, elementary, middle and high school are near this main artery which needs to provide better routes for our children and youth. the project has enormous support for the residents in the park and three district and similar other districts in the west. for every 20 years this project has been identified as being the critical transportation project for the health and well-being of the san francisco southern region, the community plan will be complete. this relatively small project
is more bang to the buck for criteria for funding, it will provide transit reliability and the over development area to the rest of the city it will provide more access and above the other projects proposed that were, the projects should begin priority due to the necessity and the long neglected community. i am familiar with the roadways not being funded by the transportation funds and which makes better sense when a roadway traverses the land and rpd funding has been cut over the years. rpd cannot possibly fund more... 1.96 percent as the budget and that is only for operations. >> okay. i will finish on that. >> one last thing. i want to say thank you to jose moscovich. he is a great loss to our community, and to our city and our community too. and also, i want everyone to
look at the people in this line here, most of them are women and i want to thank you for that. and i am done. >> next speaker, please. >> wong from the excelier. >> and also a member of the mcclarin park collaborativive and i would like to read a letter that i was authorized to present from take back our parks which is an alliance of san francisco ans across the city dedicated to keeping our open space and recreation facilities open and accessible to all people. >> take back our parks supports the collaboration between the public works and recreation parks on the project, a new multimodule thorough fair would better service the users who currently find the high speed traffic threatening. for example we support improvements such as lane reductions, pedal pathways,
better bus stop access and traffic calming and dark sky and lighting fixture and crosswalk protection, we expect it to be accomplished by preserving the natural beauty, for those who are not familiar, please come to the parking lot and see what the elks squad has done to the tree in the middle. thank you. >> thank you. very much. >> next speaker, please >> good afternoon, my name is niel, the planning commissioner, i want to support this list of projects before you today we. recognize that there is a far greater need in all of the communities and districts in san francisco than there are projects before you today. we want to especially support the school projects and the safety and privilege for masonic avenue and second street. we have had the pleasure of working with community groups, schools and many of you for five years. on those streets and improving
pedestrian and bike safety. people are dying, because they are going to the grocery store or trying to get about their daily business. >> we look forward to working with you and the staff over the coming month to refine this lift, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please? >> >> i would like to add a very important factor. there is a huge stretch of line going towards the mission. and in the direction towards city college. and that has no lighting. whatsoever. and whereby, we have two huge tanks olding tanks that belong to the san francisco public utilities commission. and they can help us somehow
with the lighting factors that are no order. they can work with pg&e. it is very important to note that you can have some beautiful parks and you can have amenities, but you also need to have the lighting fixtures so that you have safety. safety is important. we can improve the roads and if you don't have, good lighting, that adversely impacts whatever improvements are done, thank you very much. >> and any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? >> seeing none, the public comment is closed. unless we have an objection, colleagues the same house and call? the same house and call. >> could you please call the next item? >> 13,al locate, $419,672 in prop kfuns with the conditions to the san francisco muse pal transportation agency for four
requests subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules and amend the ref lant 5-year priorityization programs. >> anyone who would like to speak? >> none, seeing none it is closed >> come forward members >> could we get some more information on this item. we are talking about a lot of money here, do we have any more information on what is going to be allocated for? >> the prop k funds? >> this is an item that came before the plans and program committee where there was a hearing and there is information attached to documentation about the proposal to the agenda. so, i don't know if you have the opportunity to attend the transit programs but that is where that information is. >> okay. >> thank you. >> is there any other member of the public who would like to speak? >> seeing none, public comment